This...Excuse me while I pick myself up off the floor...This is the Most. Epic. Takedown. of an individual that I am aware ever having occurred in the history of the human species.
Rocket League
This sublime esport is badly in need of some structure. In its popularity and sponsorships (e.g. Verizon, Mobil) it has outgrown its youth-dominated, fais ce que tu voudras origins. Psyonix, the originator of the game and the Rocket League brand, needs to designate a commissioner, or at least a central public information officer. Crucial things, like ticket sales to LAN events, are passed word of mouth on Reddit. The same with roster changes.
This season, the owner of Sand Rock Gaming announced that he was done sponsoring the team. There had been...issues. Sand Rock's best player oKhaliD, couldn't make the Swedish LAN because he had future-determining final examinations in Saudi Arabia. Then, for another major tournament, called a Split, oKhaliD didn't get his passport in time. So the whole team missed out.
Most recently, a team that didn't exist a year ago, Team Queso, entered the sponsored, sanctioned competitions and quickly established themselves as the best in the world--if they had given themselves the chance to prove it in the final to be held in person in Dallas this summer. They didn't and they won't because on April 27, just three days ago, the org released all three players and announced that it won't compete in the upcoming Euro Split. The announcement was made by the org on Twitter and was immediately met with confusion. How can the best team in the world be allowed to disband right before a major tournament? The announcement advised that the players had been "transferred" to another, one, org. All three? That's what the announcement indicated, "the players," "to another org." But there was a dearth of information and reading the tea leaves didn't help. Vitara, 15 years old, thanked his teammates for giving him the chance to play professionally, which suggested that he was going to one club and the others, Joyo and rise., to another--or two others. Then there was no announcement by another org(s) that a signing of one or all had taken place. The confusion was added to by reports on April 8th that Team BDS, the official world champion, had made a strong push to add Vitara alone. The European Spring Split that Queso would have entered is in five days. I am told, but I don't know for sure, that if the new team (assuming that the players are moving en masse) has its roster submitted by Monday that they can compete in the Split.
Vitara tweeted that he will never forget all the fans who chanted for Team Queso in their months as a team. It was heartfelt but not headthought. Psyonix needs to think of the fans--and, by the by, the sponsors. Who are all of those Queso fans to root for going forward? And corporations like Verizon and Mobil don't play. When they sponsor a tournament it's with the idea that these great players and brand name teams are going to be competing. What do you mean, Psyonix, Team Queso is not playing? They're now the Virginia Squires or something? It's bush league. Sand Rock, lock, stock and barrel were picked up by Falcons, the second-best team in MENA (Middle East/North Africa). You pull bush league crap you're not going to get major league sponsors like Verizon and Mobil. There are a million groups every day clamoring for their money.
Although it's called Rocket League, there is no league. There's no headquarters, no central office, no commissioner, no official communications channel. Rocket League is like Bitcoin or the myriad start-ups at the beginning of the wild, wild, west of the early world wide web, or the alphabet soup of rebel phyusical sports leagues, ABA, WHA, WFL, USFL, XFL. Without some basic structure you're going to go the way of the Virginia Squires or Texas Instruments. Like dude, it's not about the money, we just want to have fun. That is the bottom line, kids having fun. Tweet to Psyonix: Leave Mobil alone, the kids just want to have fun, want money. Or fans. They want to go back to playing anonymously in their bedrooms for free. Like they did before turning pro.
Soccer Saturday has ended in Merry Ol'. In an early game Liverpool won at St. James Park 1-0 over Liverpool. Then, a little while later, Manchester City blasted 17th Leeds 4-0.
The race for the Premier League crown could hardly be any tighter. Both Liverpool and City have played 34 matches. City leads by one point and in case of a tie on points Liverpool have an advantage of one on goal difference. The two teams' form has been identical over the last five matches. Both have won three straight; that was preceded by their draw against each other, which was preceded by a win. Helluva race in the league and a good chance of another collision in the final of the Champions League. Britannia rules the waves.
The Miami "Heat" opened as 1.5 point favorites over Philadelphia in the series that begins Monday in Miami. But that was before the full severity of Joel Embiid's injury in game six in Toronto was known. Yesterday, Embiid was diagnosed with an orbital fracture and concussion, suffered when head coach Doc Rivers inexplicably kept Embiid--already injured with a torn ligament in his shooting hand--in the game with four minutes left and the "Sixers" up 27 points. The club announced that Embiid was out "indefinitely" and definitely for game one in Miami. And on that news the point spread has ballooned to 8.
There's a saying, and it's true, that there is nothing like NBA playoff basketball. The regular season doesn't compare. It is the showcase for the Association's incredible collection of athletes. Now, the second round of the playoffs, when things get real, will be missing the season's biggest star. It cheapens the series. If the "Heat" win it will come with an asterisk, "Yeah but Joel was hurt." If the "Sixers" win it will make a chimera of Miami's whole season.
Doc Rivers
Philadelphia 76ers' Joel
Embiid out indefinitely
with orbital fracture, mild
concussion
3:58 left in the 4th quarter, your team up 119-92--why is your star and the favorite to win league MVP, who already is playing with a torn ligament in his right (shooting) hand--why do you have him in the game, Doc? Huh? That is horrifying coaching malpractice.
Evan Leonard @EvanLeonard410
Doc Rivers should be fired immediately. Up 29 with 4 minutes to go and Embiid and Harden are still on the floor. Completely inexcusable.
Friday, April 29, 2022
"Marvel of Russian Technology"--the "Flying Tank"
The Ukrainian people have supplanted the Jewish people as my favorite on earth. They are high-spirited, good-natured, funny, resilient, brave, empathetic, fair, smart. The best.
Skunk Infestation, Three Houses, Eastern Ukraine, CLEARED April 19😄
Just one more...
Russian Olympic Running Team!
The vids of Russian skunks getting hit are my favorite.
Say what you will about The Sun, those fish wrappers have got the market cornered on these vids!
Missiles mounted on top and all get out. High value target there! Video from today, April 29:
Before
After:
Before
After:
And the hits just keep on comin'!
"Russian troops don't have any military tactics or strategy. They're just cannon fodder." 😂
They're on a SCHEDULE! Ho-ho-ho-ho-ho. (You can see the difference in his face. He betrays a faint hint of a smile and then suppresses it.) Rooski, see--you head really as beeg as your eyeball. It no work good Rooski.
Full video from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty:
Amid Hardening Western Resolve, Russia’s Eastern Drive Seems to Stall
...the Russian military’s eastern offensive was faltering, hampered by logistical issues and stiff Ukrainian resistance.
...
the Russian offensive in the Dumbass region of eastern Ukraine showed signs of stalling amid heavy battlefield losses and was now “several days behind” schedule, a senior Pentagon official said on Friday.
Britain’s Defense Intelligence agency largely concurred, saying on Friday that “Russian territorial gains have been limited and achieved at significant cost to Russian forces.”
What if their nukes don't actually, like, work?
In a video released on Friday, an aide to the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, called the Russian losses “colossal.”
Captioned by NYT:
Holy shit, that's some dead skunks on the side of the road there I'll tell ya hoo doggie! Russia get many tank volunteers?
The Russian (Con)federation
William Howard Russell, the London Times,
"...found Montgomery [Alabama] sultry and primitive, as dull and lifeless as a town in the middle of Russia."
-Bruce Catton, The Coming Fury (359)
Russian forces still face logistical challenges in their offensive, a Pentagon official says.
Russian forces are making “slow and uneven” progress in fierce fighting in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, but are still struggling to overcome the same supply line problems that hampered their initial offensive, a senior Pentagon official said on Thursday.
...Russian troops have made “incremental” progress but nowhere near enough to seize an overall advantage, the official said.
“The Russians haven’t overcome all their logistics problems,” the
official said, citing slow going on the shipment of food, fuel, weapons
and ammunition, despite having much shorter supply lines now than they
did during the war’s first several weeks...Moscow now has 92 battalion groups fighting in eastern and southern
Ukraine — up from 85 a week ago, but still well below the 125 they had
in the first phase of the war...
Just over 20 additional battalions remain in Russia in various states of combat readiness, resupplying and rearming in a patchwork of units that were badly damaged by the earlier fighting, the official said. The remainder of the original 125 battalions are most likely destroyed, and American and British officials estimate that more than 15,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war since it began
The Risks of a New U.S. Approach in Ukraine
Washington had taken pains to avoid the appearance that it was entering a direct confrontation with Moscow. That may be changing.
There is no doubt that a change has occurred in substance and tone of statements, and in actions taken.
As the horrors of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have became clearer, the Biden administration has pivoted to a more aggressive stance, with officials talking about constraining Moscow as a global power.
And the change has been that: more aggressive toward Russia directly. With the atrocities in Bucha and elsewhere, and I would add, the incompetence demonstrated by Russia's military, the scales have fallen from our eyes. With the first we see eternal Russia, uncivilized and uncivilizable, the same Russia as under Stalin. In the second we see that, unlike under Stalin, there are not unseen, innumerable Russian divisions that appear seemingly out of nowhere and with a maniacal fighting spirit, but rather more a paper tiger, still animalistic, but without the power that invoked fear. I saw deep concern, worry, yes fear, in the U.S. at the beginning of the war. I see none of that now. I see confidence. We see, as if overtaken by evolution, the (conventional) Russian military, the quality of its troops and its command structure, is as obsolete as the rotary phone. The U.S. has stated repeatedly that it sees Russia being defeated on the battlefield by Ukraine and I increasingly think that the U.S. has come to feel, "If UKRAINE (?!) can defeat Russia, WE can defeat Russia."
But that is an escalation, and escalations can go wrong.
-David E. Sanger
It is escalation, Sanger, who I respect and admire, is, as always, right about that. And yes, escalations can go wrong. The U.S. nuclear force is outgunned quantitatively and (on paper) qualitatively by Russia. In the worst case of a full nuclear exchange with Russia the U.S. would be badly mauled, perhaps destroyed completely. That is an enormous risk, but the U.S. clearly is prepared to push the envelope right to the edge of the nuclear precipice. I trust Blinken and Austin and Haines. They know what Russia's real capabilities are, what the risks are, what the U.S. will do if worse comes to worst, even better than does David E. Sanger. Clearly they feel that the recent change in stance is what should be done in the American interest.
The United States toughened its messaging on the Ukraine war, saying that the American aim was not just to thwart the Russian invasion but also to weaken Russia so it could no longer carry out such military aggression anywhere.
The change in stance could signal a situation that pits Washington more directly against Moscow.
Late last night the Pittsburgh “Steelers” made their pick in the 2022 NFL Draft.
"We're super, super excited to be able to draft Kenny Pickett with our first-round pick," [“Steelers” general manager Kevin] Colbert said. "Honestly, never thought he would make it to us at 20. Exciting times for us, for Kenny, for the University of Pittsburgh, and for Pittsburgh in general. It's great. We couldn't be more excited.”
👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻
G.D.P. Report Shows U.S. Economy Shrank, Masking Broader Recovery
That lede and the graph below is all that voters in 2022 and 2024 will remember.
Despite the contraction in the first quarter, consumer spending and business investment suggested the recovery remained resilient.
Despite the resilient recovery all voters will remember is that the economy contracted in the first quarter.
The overall figure understates the recovery because inventories needed less rebuilding and consumer spending widened the trade deficit.
Despite the overall figure understating the recovery, all voters will remember is that the economy contracted in the first quarter of President Biden's second year
The U.S. economy contracted in the first three months of the year, as supply constraints at home, demand shortfalls abroad and rapid inflation worldwide weighed on an otherwise resilient recovery.
Whatever the reasons all voters will remember is that the U.S. economy contracted in the first three months of President Biden's second year.
Gross domestic product, adjusted for inflation, fell 0.4 percent in the first quarter, the Commerce Department said Thursday. It was the first decline since the early days of the pandemic, and a sharp reversal from the rapid 1.7 percent growth in the final three months of 2021.
Seven months before the mid-term elections all that voters will remember is that the GDP fell 0.4% in the first quarter of President Biden's second year.
But the negative number masked evidence of a recovery that economists said remained fundamentally strong. The decline — 1.4 percent on an annualized basis — mostly resulted from the way inventories and trade figure in the calculation, as well as reduced government spending as Covid-19 relief efforts wind down. Measures of underlying demand showed solid growth.
Despite the masking of evidence of a fundamentally strong recovery all that voters will remember in November is that the economy shrank in the first three months of President Biden's second year.
Most important, consumer spending, the engine of the U.S. economy, grew 0.7 percent in the first quarter despite soaring gas prices and the Omicron wave of the coronavirus, which restrained spending on restaurants, travel and similar services in January.
Most important for voters in November 2022 and November 2024 is that inflation reaches a 40-year high and the U.S. economy shrank in the first quarter of President Biden's second year.
“Consumer spending is the aircraft carrier in the middle of the ocean — it just keeps plowing ahead,” said Jay Bryson, chief economist for Wells Fargo.
What voters will remember in November 2022 and November 2024 is that the aircraft carrier of the U.S. economy was hit by Neptune missiles that inflicted damaging inflation at a 40-year high and that the economy listed at an annual rate of 1.4% in the first three months of President Biden's second year and they will rout Democrats in November 2022, take back the House of Representatives and probably the Senate and will probably be favorited to win back the presidency in Nov. 2024.
The voting public views the first year and one-half of Biden's presidency as an unmitigated failure. As a WaPo columnist wrote today, if, as is likely, Russia defeats Ukraine eventually, American voters will blame Biden, not Putin. There is time for Biden to recover but no compelling path to recovery. The Biden presidency will be viewed as an aberrant interregnum between two authoritarian administrations, if, as seems a foregone conclusion, both houses of Congress are lost in November 2022 and the presidency in Nov. 2024. Authoritarian American will re-intrench and will be even more difficult, if not impossible, to dislodge in elections subsequent to 2024 and beyond. The authoritarian takeover of America will be solidified and the lights will go out on Democracy in America.
Thursday, April 28, 2022
FT NO 109 PHO 115 (4-2)
Old Chris Paul was perfection tonight, 14/14 from the field, 1/1 from range, 4/4 FT. As a team the "Suns" shot 60% (40%) 94.4%. Unreal in a playoff close-out game 6 on the other guy's floor. The "Pelicans" shot 50.6% (33.3%) 89.5%.
So I watched parts of three games tonight, Florida at Ottawa hockey, both teams with nothing to play for, Philadelphia at Toronto, basketball, although could have been hockey, the pivotal game 6, and Phoenix at New Orleans basketball.
The most consistently hard-played game was the one that mattered the least, "Panthers" at "Senators." "Panthers" won 4-0, but it was a 1-0 game starting the third period.
The "Sixers"-"Raptors" game was a snore zone after halftime. Philadelphia made the "Raptors" extinct 132-97. Every starter in blue tonight was in double figures. The "Sixers" shot 58% from the whole field and 40% from three. Whatever demons tormented Philadelphia and its fans were exorcised with extreme prejudice tonight.
The closest, but not the best-played, game is PHO-NO. With 2:35 left in the 4th it's 100-101. In the parts I watched neither team could make a shot and both teams threw the ball away repeatedly. I was astonished to read that both teams were shooting 50%+ with PHO closer to 60%. (?) The "Suns" looked anything but the best team in the Association. The "Sixers", who open the second round at Miami Monday, looked the part.
If Russia starts winning, Americans won’t blame Ukraine. They’ll blame Biden.
I had not thought about that, but he's right, they will.
My girl-child cemented her place in my personal pantheon with Bruce Catton's Civil War trilogy. I have read many books on the Civil War, too many biographies of Lincoln, bios of others, books on specific battles, Chancellorsville, Fredericksburg, Gettysburg, regimental histories in trying to learn anything I could about my great-great grandfather, Sgt. Nathan Bracken. But only one comprehensive history of the war, James McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom. I don't remember what choices I had when I bought Battle Cry, it was certainly among the most recent general histories to come on the market and that appealed to me, but the one factor that I liked most was that it was a single-volume work--Did I really need to devote the time to a multi-volume history?--and yet, at 900 pages, was hardly a Cliff Notes version. I very much liked Battle Cry. But Catton, my God. He is a far better writer. The three volumes are a total of 1,400 pages, so more detail, obviously, but not mind-numbing minutiae. He did spend a few pages too many on Fort Sumter but other than that the first book, The Coming Fury, has moved right along, my interest has never flagge, in fact, to the contrary, Catton's detail colors the narrative. I have quoted from it previously, just in the last post actually, and here is another example of the writing. Lincoln's attitude was,
What had to be done would be done, and now and then some odd-looking instruments would be used.
(paragraph)
Among these was the eminent Massachusetts politician Benjamin F. Butler.
That's it. "Gross." I literally laughed out loud. Le mot juste.
Philadelphia at Toronto, 7 p.m.
Cannot wait for this one. May even watch it (at my son's place). Phil is a 1.5 point fave. (?) If I was a gambling man...To a standard of satisfy my wallet's conscience Tonto will win.
Puttin' things in the right order
There are parallels in every prior war, I am sure, to aspects of the Russian war on Ukraine but I am reading now about the American Civil War:
"(One of the characteristic aspects of this utterly confusing war was the general feeling, among active secessionists, that it was somehow perfidious and unnaturally evil for the Federal government to resist when war-like measures were taken against it.) Catton, The Coming Fury (348)
Who fired the first shot? The South Carolinians.Who invaded whom? Russia invaded Ukraine. How dare those damn Yankees/Ukrainians shoot back!
Who bombed whose capital city first in World War II? Hitler bombed, almost to rubble, London first. How dare those English stage a show raid on Berlin in response!
People are crazy, man.
Russia Must Be Destroyed
Fears Are Mounting That Ukraine War Will Spill Across Borders
David E. Sanger [<--the best] and Steven Erlanger
WASHINGTON — For nine weeks, President Biden and the Western allies have emphasized the need to keep the war for Ukraine inside Ukraine.
Now, the fear in Washington and European capitals is that the conflict may soon escalate into a wider war — spreading to neighboring states, to cyberspace and to NATO countries suddenly facing a Russian cutoff of gas. Over the long term, such an expansion could evolve into a more direct conflict between Washington and Moscow reminiscent of the Cold War, as each seeks to sap the other’s power.
In the past three days, the American secretary of defense has called for an effort to degrade the capability of the Russian military so that it could not invade another country for years to come. The Russians have cut off gas shipments to Poland and Bulgaria, which joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization after the collapse of the Soviet Union;... Explosions have rocked a disputed area of Moldova, a natural next target for the Russians, and gas depots and even a missile factory in Russia have mysteriously caught fire or come under direct attack from Ukrainian forces.
And with increasing frequency, the Russians are reminding the world of
the size and power of their nuclear arsenal, an unsubtle warning that if
President Vladimir V. Putin’s conventional forces face any more
humiliating losses, he has other options. American and European
officials...behind the scenes...are
already gaming out how they might react to a Russian nuclear test, or
demonstration explosion, over the Black Sea or on Ukrainian territory.
In my reading of the irradiated tea leaves all of this was already baked in to Austin's pronouncement. Clearly, as the undersigned wrote yesterday, or the day before, the substance and tone of American statements and actions have changed since the beginning of the war. American officials no longer offer Zelensky a "ride" into exile. They no longer have worry lines creasing their foreheads; in a photo op with Zelensky, Austin and Blinken are smiling, Austin broadly. Zelensky looks like a POW. The Biden administration has gotten everything right in Ukraine so far, they have read Putin like like a first grade reader. I am extremely skeptical that in the last three days they have taken a big gulp of Stupid.
...
American and European officials say their fears are based in part on the growing conviction that the conflict could “go on for some time,” as Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken put it recently.
Yes. The longer something bad goes on the more likely that something worse will occur. That is a seasoned judgment. Do the fearful though not expect the war to go on for some time? Would they have it not? There are some, I was among them, who dismissed Ukrainian resistance as futile blood shedding. But the West is not going to repeat Munich and negotiate away a state's existence. No foreigner from 5,000 miles away is going to tell the leader and people of a sovereign nation not to fight. The fearful must answer the question: Would they have Ukraine not resist? The West not send war military materiel?
American and European determination to help Ukraine defeat ["the word you're looking for is crushed"] the Russians has hardened, partly after the atrocities in Bucha and other towns occupied by the Russians became clear...
Yes, it is an emotional reaction. Reason can be solidified with the fire of emotion. What kind of a people would we be if our "determination" were not "hardened" by Russian anthropoids raping, murdering, and beheading Ukrainian women, children (including one baby that an anthropoid self-video'd himself sexually abusing), the elderly, civilians all? If a "wider war" comes, even a nuclear war, these are righteous reasons for Armageddon.
...
“Russian casualties are continuing to mount, and the U.S. is committed to shipping more powerful weapons that are causing those casualties,” [expert] said. Sooner or later, he added, Russia’s military intelligence service might begin to target those weapons shipments inside NATO’s borders.
Once more, what do the worriers propose, even retrospectively? That Ukraine not have killed Russian soldiers? That they cease killing them now? By international law and common sense the West was a party to this war the moment it sent Ukraine the first rifle. The West knows, and the West knew then, that under the rules of war weapons trains in third countries can be targeted. The worriers, and I do not mean that derogatorily, I too am a worrier, would serve their worry better by minding the law of chronology: You cannot travel back in time.
1) Putin masses to invade. We warn. Our warnings are dismissed by Zelensky;
2) Biden tells Putin exactly what he will do if he invades: no boots on the ground but cut Russia out of the global financial system. Putin: "If you do there will be a complete rupture of diplomatic relations." Perfect clarity.
3) Putin invades. Zelensky morphs from Chamberlain to Churchill and pleads with the West for,
a) immediate EU membership (denied),
b) a no-fly zone (denied),
c) materiel (granted). And the war came.
Pause there. Putin is the actor, the West is the reactor. We went to the UN on several occasions, got no result other than meaningless resolutions. We worriers need to answer: Should we not have gone beyond the UN? Let Ukraine be ravished? Devoid of all human empathy--but not of all logic. Ukraine was not a member of the EU nor of NATO. Ukraine's existence does not--standing alone (key, key qualifier)--implicate the EU's existence or the U.S.'s existence. Ergo, invade away, Vladimir, just pay the toll booth as you enter and leave. That was President Obama's approach to Crimea; it was President Biden's approach at the beginning; it was at least half of my (a Worrier) approach on Feb. 24. We worriers, mindful of international law, were wary of providing any materiel to Ukraine. "Okay, defensive weaponry only." Okay, that is not a distinction recognized under international law. "Okay, we're going to provide it anyway." Okay, I agree. Should we worriers not have agreed? We need to answer.
...
Stephen Kotkin, a professor at Princeton University and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford...recently... wrote that “the original Cold War’s end was a mirage,” as the effort to integrate Russia into the West slowly collapsed.
So true. "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation FOREVER!"
President Biden himself has endorsed the theory that Mr. Putin has designs that go beyond Ukraine. The invasion, he said on the day it began, Feb. 24, was “always about... Putin’s desire for empire by any means necessary.”
"Theory". Nothing wrong with theories, a little Ivory Tower-sounding, "not proven" is what theory means. Was that the case here? Were Biden and Blinken and all them thinkers and diplomatists contemplating their navals? No. A NATO rollback was what Putin articulated many times, what Lavrov proposed to the Bidens as a "solution" to European security.
Once again I can see the logic of the illogical reverse-logic of the Russian position. I opposed NATO expansion. I opposed it early and often. "So if you opposed it then why not roll it back now?" Because you cannot time travel. You cannot undo acts. You can mitigate the consequences of past acts but you cannot undo them. The consequence of past NATO expansion was, in our minds contemplation of Russia's mind, Russian fear. We mitigated. We didn't attack. For thirty years we didn't attack Russia. We extended NATO membership to Ukraine and Georgia. That increased Russian fear. We mitigated. We didn't admit Ukraine and Georgia. In 2014 Russian fear morphed into paranoia (or came to be seen increasingly as cover for their real game, imperialism) with the Euromaidan protests. The Ukrainian people evinced unequivocally their fervent desire to be done with Russia and to join the EU (denied (by both Russian invasion of Crimea and by the EU)).
...
Coincidentally or not, Mr. Putin’s move came just after Defense Secretary Austin went beyond the administration’s oft-repeated statement...to get Russia to withdraw its forces “irreversibly,”...and respect Ukraine’s borders as they existed before the invasion...“We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds
of things that it has done in invading Ukraine,” Mr. Austin said, a
line that seemed to suggest the U.S. wanted to erode Russian military
power for years — presumably as long as Mr. Putin remains in power.
Actually, he meant "as long as anthropoids remain in Russia." (actually not (I don't think)).
Some Europeans wondered whether Washington’s war aims had broadened from helping Ukraine to defend itself, which has broad support, to damaging [the word you're looking for is crushing] Russia itself, a controversial goal that would feed into a Russian narrative that Moscow’s actions in Ukraine are to defend itself against NATO.
Focus: Which happened first? Who acted, who reacted? Who caused Russia itself to be damaged, the West, or "Russia itself"? It is "controversial" that we, the U.S., not Europeans, some, want to "damage" Russia itself? All of the European Union agreed, in fact, took the lead over the U.S., in imposing the economic sanctions that "damaged", nay rocketed, the Russian economy into pre-21st century isolation. That has severely damaged Russia itself. Worriers: should we not have so-damaged Russia? With belief beyond a reasonable doubt the United States is done with Russia. Forever. There is no going back from this, not from Bucha, not from the as yet unknown in Mariupol. The Russians have grazed themselves full on NATO paranoia through 5 of the last 0 NATO attacks on them for 25 years. Let them feed on the real thing on our dime.
Some administration officials insist Austin’s comments were overinterpreted, [“We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine”] and that he was not suggesting a long-term strategic goal of undermining Russian power. Instead, they say, he was just amplifying past statements about the need to sharpen the choices facing Putin — while setting back Russia’s ability to launch another invasion once it regroups.
I too studied Austin's words, all 24 of them. I was not sure if those 24 words meant "in other countries" or continuing in Ukraine. I concluded that it was not reasonable to interpret them as applying to Ukraine. Now with Sanger & Erlanger I am not sure if "another invasion once [Russia] regroups" refers to Ukraine or another country. But I was crystal clear about the meaning of "We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can't do the kinds of things it has done" wherever. Yes, Austin "wants to see Russia weakened" permanently and I have no idea what "amplifying" and "sharpening" Putin's "choices" means.
But many in Europe thought his statement suggested a long war of attrition that could have many fronts.
Austin's statement did not "suggest a long war of attrition," Russia's inability to grab its ass with both hands and Ukraine's resistance "suggested a long war of attrition."
“Are we headed for a wider war or is this just a gaffe by Austin?” asked François Heisbourg, a French defense analyst.
A gaffe? No, Francois, it was not a gaffe. A wider war is Putin's call. (He is the actor.) We are ready if he chooses a wider war. The West's "determination" has "hardened". Everyone in the West now is hard.
“There is a widening consensus about supplying Ukraine howitzers and more complex weapons systems, and everyone is now doing that. But it’s another thing to pivot the war aim from Ukraine to Russia. I don’t believe there’s any consensus on that.” Weakening Russia’s military capacity “is a good thing to do,” Mr. Heisbourg said, “but it’s a means to an end, not an end in itself.”
Uh...Hmm...no consensus on pivoting the war aim from Ukraine to Russia; "weakening Russia's military capacity is a good". "Russia itself", no good. "But a means to an end, not an end in itself." Yes, I think we have shifted our focus from purely defending Ukraine's people and the country's integrity as a state to "Never Again." I do think the U.S., and I think the NATO countries' leaders, are done with Russia and I think the U.S. believes the Russian military is done for. I can understand there not being consensus on pivoting the war aim to "Russia itself." I don't know for sure if the Bidens pivoted to a war on Russia itself. There is a distinction, clearly. The Bidens see it. However, I think the Biden's view at this point is it is a distinction without much difference to them. The president has said Putin cannot remain in power. The administration has hoped for a popular revolt or a revolt of the generals. Neither has happened. The Russian military is the spear of the Russian people, who support Putin, who support the war, whose wives give permission to their husband-soldiers to rape Ukrainian women. Brutality in war is as Russian as vodka. I personally don't see how replacing Putin with some other Putin-lite brings the distinction between the Russian military and "Russia itself" into sharper relief. Russia has terrorized the world since 1917. They now intend to rollback NATO to pre-1997 levels. It is Russian policy that Ukraine is the opening battle in "the final struggle" (in the words of the Internationale). We accept. Or we surrender to nuclear blackmail and let the raping and murdering proceed from Kviv to Warsaw to Berlin to Paris.
I pick a nit with Mr. Heisbourg on another point. I don't understand how any defensive strategy can be eternally defensive. For instance: Russia is able to resupply and replenish from the motherland and from Belarus. Ukraine has no such ability. Ukraine loses X number of soldiers, we are not replenishing their personnel losses. Ukraine loses Y number of fighter aircraft, are we not to resupply them with the materiel to shoot down Russian war planes, to attack "Russia itself" and its weapons stores? Weakening Russia's military capacity "is a good thing to do", Mr. Heisbourg says; the economic sanctions were, presumably, a good thing for him, too; providing Ukraine with heavier and more advanced weaponry has "widening consensus" which "everyone" is doing. I am not clear whether Heisbourg thinks that is a good thing as well or if he is saying it is a fait accompli.
Pause again. You cannot reverse time travel but neither are you in for a dime in for a dollar. That is, the fact fact that the West made itself a party to the war by providing materiel does not mean that it must continually up its ante ad infinitum. "Okay, next, we're going to ship nukes to Ukraine." NO WE ARE NOT. You can stop, in other words. From the first day Putin has warned the West about "interfering". He and his lackeys continually raise the spectre of a nuclear counterreaction. The latest tranche of more powerful, sophisticated weapons systems need not have been. It is not unreasonable for anyone to worry about it. The West can say, thus far but no farther at any time. What does Heisbourg say? I don't know. What do the Bidens say? Farther. What do I say? I trust the Bidens. Weapon resupply is necessary to weaken Russia's military. In a word, the "pivot" to Russia itself is necessary--even if our "war aim" remains solely on Ukraine. Unpause.
At least in the U.S., and I believe in NATO as well, the sanctions were never "a means to an end," the end of the war with Ukraine intact. President Biden has been crystal clear that no sanctions stop war. Which leaves the purpose of the military aid and an apparent distinction that Heisbourg is drawing between "weakening Russia militarily" ("good") and a "Russia [itself] weakened" permanently (not good). It seems reasonably, but not beyond doubt, clear that both Austin and Heisbourg mean "Russia militarily". There is a distinction if Austin intended to conflate the two and which Heisbourg can draw if he intends to. However the clearer, less Talmudic scholar-reading is to military "weakening." Since that is a good in both men's eyes (and it is a good in my 20/400 eyes) I don't know how Heisbourg would have weakening Russia's military capacity come about without widening the war by having NATO countries resupply arms. I am truly at a loss to how Mr. Heisbourg would thread the needle between weakening Russia military and not weakening Russia itself. I sincerely want to know what alternative he suggests since "weakening Russia militarily" is a good thing in his eyes. What should the West be doing that it is not doing and what should it not be doing that it is? Heisbourg needs to answer.
There are other factors that risk broadening the conflict. Within weeks, Sweden and Finland are expected to seek entry into NATO — expanding the alliance in reaction to Mr. Putin’s efforts to break it up. But the process could take months because each NATO country would have to ratify the move, and that could open a period of vulnerability. Russia could threaten both countries before they are formally accepted into the alliance and are covered by the NATO treaty that stipulates an attack on one member is an attack on all.
If Russia attacked Sweden and Finland in the interregnum--see Ukraine.
But there is less and less doubt that Sweden and Finland will become the 31st and 32nd members of the alliance...Robin Niblett, the director of Chatham House, a British think tank...said a new expansion of NATO — just what Mr. Putin has been objecting to for the last two decades — would “make explicit the new front lines of the standoff with Russia.”
...
Russia has its own handbook, episodically arguing that its goals go beyond “denazification” of Ukraine to the removal of NATO forces and weapons from allied countries that did not host either before 1997. Moscow’s frequent references to the growing risk of nuclear war seem intended to drive home the point that the West should not push too far.
And it is that which is the "wider war" that Francois Heisbourg fears--with good reason! But it's here. The wider war is here. Now. It has been in the Russian "handbook" and on Vladimir Putin's lips for years. He activated it on February 24, 2022. Ukraine was step one of a dozen. Russia (itself) must be destroyed.
Wednesday, April 27, 2022
Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, April 26
April 26, 6:30 pm ET
Russian forces have adopted a sounder pattern of operational movement in eastern Ukraine, at least along the line from Izyum to Rubizhne. Russian troops are pushing down multiple roughly parallel roads within supporting distance of one another, allowing them to bring more combat power to bear than their previous practice had supported. [Bold in original]
Russian troops on this line are making better progress than any other Russian advances in this phase of the war. They are pushing from Izyum southwest toward Barvinkove and southeast toward Slovyansk. They are also pushing several columns west and south of Rubizhne, likely intending to encircle it and complete its capture. The Russian advances even in this area are proceeding methodically rather than rapidly, however, and it is not clear how far they will be able to drive or whether they will be able to encircle Ukrainian forces in large numbers.
...
Russian troops continued to attack Ukrainian defenders in Mariupol, including in the Azovstal Plant, despite Russian President Vladimir Putin’s claims that there is no more fighting in the city.
...
Russia is staging false-flag attacks in Transnistria, Moldova, likely setting conditions for further actions on that front. The two motorized rifle battalions Russia has illegally maintained [emphasis added] in Transnistria since the end of the Cold War are not likely sufficient to mount a credible attack on Odesa by themselves, nor are the Russians likely to be able to reinforce them enough to allow them to do so. They could support more limited attacks to the northwest of Odesa, possibly causing panic and creating psychological effects to benefit Russian operations in the south of Ukraine.
Russia may also seek to destabilize Moldova [Not a NATO member]itself, however. ...Putin might recognize the self-styled Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (PMR) in Transnistria...The PMR could then ask for additional Russian protection...Any such activities would greatly raise tensions and fears in Moldova and neighboring Romania, [NATO member] putting additional pressure on NATO, possibly giving Putin a cheap “win,” and distracting from Russia’s slog in eastern Ukraine.
Continued indications that Russian forces intend to hold referenda to establish “people’s republics” in occupied areas of southern Ukraine raise the possibility that Putin intends to unveil an array of new “independent” “people’s republics” as part of a Victory Day celebration. ...
Trae Young... just got issued a reality check courtesy of the Miami Heat. ...before mercifully finishing a five-game gentleman's sweep of the Atlanta Hawks on Tuesday.
Beyond averaging just 15.4 points while being held to single digits in two of the five games, Young's series numbers look abysmal.
- 30 turnovers against 22 made shots
- 18 percent 3-point shooting
- 31 percent overall shooting
Young bookended the series with a combined 19 points on 3-for-24 shooting, including 0 for 12 from 3, and 12 turnovers in Games 1 and 5. He posted 10 turnovers in Game 2 and never topped eight assists in any game. For all intents and purposes, he was erased...
...Young is not yet the kind of superstar that can thrive independent of his own terms.
Awkward. Better: Young is the kind of superstar who can only thrive on his own terms.
He needs to be able to get into the paint. He needs to be covered for defensively. Miami kept him from doing the latter, and they went after him every chance they got on the defensive end. The math of Young is simple: He has to create a ton of points to come out as a plus when you subtract all the points he's responsible for giving up, either directly or indirectly. He was minus-58 for the series.
After the Game 5 loss, Young said the Heat defense was "for sure" the best he's ever faced. ..."I couldn't get to certain places I normally get to."
That place, again, is the paint. When he can't get there,...he starts becoming too reliant on 3-point shooting, which, contrary to popular belief, has not historically been Young's strength.
...Young is, and long has been, an average shooter disguised as a great one. Young shot 36 percent form 3 in his lone college season, 32 percent his rookie season, 36 percent his second season and 34 percent last season.
Miami...game-planned to force Young into his worst habit, which is falling deeply in love with the 3-ball, with the operative term being deep.
After Game 1...Young had this to say: "If you're watching the game, you see they have five people in the paint when I have the ball. They're doing a great job of showing help and not letting me get into the paint. If I try to drive by somebody, they're sending a double and forcing me to kick it to my teammates."
Man, he DOES! lol
This is what happens when you're a superstar and you always have the ball. You're easy to track; not necessarily easy to defend, but easy to track. Hawks president Travis Schlenk has spoken with me numerous times about his and the coaches' efforts to get Young to see the value of moving more without the ball, where tracking him becomes a more difficult prospect. This is something he still needs to commit to and work on but it also requires the Hawks fielding enough capable playmakers that Young can be freed to move off the ball.
Schlenk has tried to construct his roster with that in mind. From Kevin Huerter to Bogdan Bogdanovic and DeAndre Hunter, who didn't have a great season but has evolved as a self-creator, you can see the idea of multiple handlers on the court. But the gap between those guys and Young is so great that it's difficult to go away from Young creating everything...
I did notice that just following the games in the play-by-play. Atlanta's roster SUCKS. I was not impressed with Huerter or the Director.
As constructed, the Hawks are almost entirely reliant on Young being magical.
Yes.
...the bottom line is that Young, from the very first quarter of the series, too easily gave into that frustration. He said to heck with the hassle and started hoisting up 3s.
That is what I meant by being undisciplined.
That was an excellent article.